Tom Clancy and Usama bin-Laden

In the ten years since 9-11 why has Tom Clancy never published anything championing the war on terror? Could it be he doesn't believe in it?

Clancy's government partner has always been Dr. Steve Pieczenik. It was Dr. Pieczenik who was the source for Clancy's information, and Jack Ryan was patterned after him. During the 1970s and 1980s Dr. Pieczenik was the government's principal figure on all matters related to counter-terrorism. He received his Phd in International Relations under Lucien Pye at M.I.T. while also completing his medical degree at Harvard. There are few geniuses in government, but he is without question a genius-level intellect. He used to be the counter-terror guru; the one to whom everyone else deferred.

What does Dr. Pieczenik say about the war on terror and Usama bin-Laden?

-UBL has been dead since 2003. His recent "killing" is a hoax.

-9/11 was known in advance and permitted to happen. The Patriot Act was fully composed five weeks before the attack.

-The purposes of the War On Terror are domestic politics/resource competition with China.

I am not in a position to know if his conclusions are valid or not. Sometimes geniuses go bent, and othertimes they're just far ahead of everyone else. However there is no one in the counter-terrorism field who is more distinguished. He should not be ignored.

I think you need to read "Tiger by the Tail"
also a number of his non fiction works, such as "Inside a Special Forces Group"

But what do you really think about the Middle East, TAE?

Moreso, what do you really think about the U.S.?

Why not just get it out on the table so us simple folk understand without all the reading!

(I kinda get it, really I kinda do!)

My suggestion to you is a trip to your local library. Clancy has written a new book that is nothing but dedicated to new anti-terrorism activities.

He even brings back Jack Ryan and his son Jack Jr., and the apple didn't fall far from the tree.

Just my $ 0.02....

Not everybody has time to read a lot of fiction. In fact, Tae's posts take up all the time I have alloted for that genre.

But what do you really think about the Middle East, TAE? Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

I spent the better part of a career working in that area because as early as 1979 it was clear to everyone in government that it was going to be where the action was in the future, which is now the past.

I think that the era of militant violent Islam is over.

I think that Arab youth has turned their backs on terror and fundamentalism.

I think they are focused on trying to improve their own lives and governments.

I think bin-Laden and his kind are consigned to the dustbin of history.

I think the sooner our government recognizes this we will have a world of new opportunities over there.

But I also think the Israeli issue will continue to be a problem, and in fact will get worse as the governments we've coopted in the the Arab world are swept away.

In terms of Pieczenik I think the following:

Psychops operators I've known tend to see conspiracies because they've spent their careers as parts of them. Pieczenik was our most accomplished psychops figure for twenty years.

He doesn't have to be completely right to have some insights.

I think there are people in the U.S. for whom the War On Terror has served their interests well, and they are secretly glad it happened. I think it's clear that the Patriot Act was drafted before 9-11 for whatever reason, and that will naturally lead people to wonder why.

I think the timing of the bin-Laden raid last week was suspicious.
It came in the middle of Pakistan's re-assessment of their alliance with us, and just as Obama launched his re-election effort.

I've said many times on these boards that Pakistan has been double-dealing us, but I don't blame them. They are only pretending to be our friends but we are only pretending to be theirs, so what are they to do?

In the ten years since 9-11 why has Tom Clancy never published anything championing the war on terror? Could it be he doesn't believe in it? Originally Posted by theaustinescorts

Facts are wonderful. And stubborn, difficult to erase or ignore. The existence of facts constrains intelligent discussion and provides a basis for the application of logic. Assertions of fact are a test of reliability.

Maybe this is all literary license. I understand this is usually reserved for fiction, but why be constrained by convention on, of all places, a SHMB?

And, speaking of conspiracies, perhaps the following were never actually written....

1. The Teeth Of The Tiger, 2003; by Tom Clancy.

"A man named Mohammed sits in a café in Vienna, about to propose a deal to a Colombian. Mohammed has a strong network of agents and sympathizers throughout Europe and the Middle East, and the Colombian has an equally strong drug network throughout America. What if they were to form an alliance, to combine all their assets and connections? The potential for profits would be enormous -- and the potential for destruction unimaginable.
In the Brave New World of terrorism, where anybody with a spare AK-47, a knowledge of kitchen chemistry, or simply the will to die can become a player, the old rules no longer apply. No matter what new governmental organizations come into being, the only ones that could be truly effective are those that are quick and agile, free of oversight and restrictions. . . and outside the system." (from Clancy website)

2. Dead or Alive, 2010, by Tom Clancy.

"It is called the Campus. Secretly created under the administration of President Jack Ryan, its sole purpose is to hunt down, locate, and eliminate terrorists and those who protect them at will, without sanction or oversight. A self-sufficient entity, it has no official connection to the American government—a necessity in a time when those in power consider themselves above such arcane ideals as loyalty, justice, and right or wrong." (Clancy website)

3. Nonfiction: Shadow Warriors: Inside the Special Forces, 2003, by Tom Clancy with General Carl Stiner and Tony Koltz.

"These are the first-hand accounts of soldiers fighting outside the lines: counterterrorism, raids, hostage rescues, reconnaissance, counterinsurgency, and psychological operations -- from Vietnam and Laos to Lebanon to Panama, to Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Iraq, to the new wars of today. . ." (Clancy website)

Well now I guess I've figured it out.

Some of us look at it as something other than the Israeli issue.

Others have no love or understanding in their hearts for the treachery of the government of Pakistan.

And yes, some of us believe Tom Clancy has no responsibility to write about anything Tom Clancy doesn't want to write about.

Just put him on ignore.

Oh, and by the way, while I am not obsessed with this issue any more than any other issue in the world, I do disagree with a lot of what you purport. However, I do compliment you on your spin. Maybe you could be the first agency dude on Bill Maher!

Well now I guess I've figured it out.

Oh, and by the way, while I am not obsessed with this issue any more than any other issue in the world, I do disagree with a lot of what you purport. However, I do compliment you on your spin. Maybe you could be the first agency dude on Bill Maher! Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

But his "current choice of career" would be a more interesting subject to discuss with Mr Maher. . In that discussion, at least TAE has some facts, and current information.....as distorted as it may be.

I think the biggest influence Pieczenik can be seen in Clancy was in "Clear and Present Danger"* in which the black hats within the national security establishment conspired with a venal president to misuse counter-terrorism for domestic political purposes.

After it was published C.I.A. and other agencies pretty much shut down from their cooperation with Clancy, and everyone was surprised, dismayed, and even shocked.

It's true that Clancy has written about the activities of operators involved with counter-terror, but as far as I know he hasn't endorsed any of it's current precepts as put forward by presidents Bush and Obama.** This is such a contrast from his cold war works, and those dealing with terrorists in the 1980s and 1990s such as "Patriot Games."

*The title itself refers to the misuse of that term by the President to carry on a counter-terrorist campaign for domestic reasons. In the story the enemy never really was a "clear and present danger," but was labeled as such by the black hats.

**Or if he has such works have not been prominent enough to have caught my attention. Where was he in invasion of Iraq for example? Did he do anything to acknowledge agreement with that?

ps - When I did government work I began to see that there were black hats and white hats, and it bothered me that the white hats didn't care much. That's typical of any profession. The black hats among lawyers aren't really singled out by their less sinister colleagues, and the same is true in medicine. Most white hats find it hard to even see the sinister nature of some of their brother colleagues until some particularly heinous thing happens - and then they're sooo shocked.